论股东表决权信托
摘要
股东表决权信托,是指一个或数个委托人(股东)根据信托契约,将其所持有的表决权转让给受托人,使其行使股权上的表决权和与表决权密切相关的其它附属权利,受托人依据信托协议,为委托人股东(受益人)的利益,在协议规定或法律规定的期限内行使表决权的信托制度。表决权信托是信托的一种,但是其委托人的身份特殊；表决权信托是股东行使表决权的一种间接方式,但是其与表决权的间接行使的其它方式又有本质的区别,其具有不可撤销性,期限性、延展性；表决权信托是股东争夺公司控制权的一种手段。
现今,关于表决权信托研究最多的是美国、日本和我国台湾地区。表决权信托产生于美国,在美国经历了肯定到否定再到肯定的命运。产生之初,判例法上多承认其有效性,但由于后来表决权信托被作为实现垄断经营的工具,给美国的社会经济造成了很大的损害,19世纪的美国法院多否定其有效性。但由于其不可替代的价值适应经济发展的需要,而且,1840年制定的反垄断法(谢尔曼法)有效的防止了表决权信托被当做垄断经营的手段。所以,美国后期的制定法开始承认表决权信托的有效性,以期避免其弊端发挥其最大的制度价值。现今的美国,除了曼彻斯特州以外,各州都以成文法的形式承认了表决权信托的有效性。而且,曼彻斯特州在实践中也已承认了表决权信托的效力。日本商法典中没有关于表决权信托的明文规定,但是在公司实践中却屡见不鲜。其实践中的表决权信托是指以行使表决权为目的,将股东权中的所有权利进行信托的信托,而不是将表决权从股权中独立出来而进行的信托。我国的台湾地区在其公司法和企业并购法中对表决权信托做了明文规定。不过其表决权信托的应用范围仅限于企业并购时,而且受托人仅限于专业的信托机构或兼营信托业务的金融公司。
表决权信托在我国具有独特的价值：有利于我国上市公司国有股的运营和重组、有利于解决我国公司职工持股计划的上市,而且可以成为我国信托机构的特色服务。我国相关法律、法规中没有关于表决权信托的直接规定,但是也没有不允许表决权信托的禁止性规定,而且2002年青岛啤酒就曾利用表决权信托成功融资。所以,我国有必要也有可能建立表决权信托。本文在比较了现今世界的相关立法体例后,笔者认为我国应该在公司法中对其进行原则性规定,而对于具体的实施则参照信托法的相关规定。对于表决权信托的具体制度的设计,在将我国公司法及信托法的相关规定与美国公司法的相关规定进行比较分析的基础上,阐释了表决权信托必须具有符合法律规定或者协议规定的期限和目的、经过登记与公示才能成立与生效；受托人应该为委托人的利益,诚实信用的行使表决权。同时对共同受托人发生分歧时的解决方法；对法律关系当事人的权利与义务；受托人行使表决权的限制及受托人违反信托义务时的民事责任问题进行了论述。
The development of voting trust is accompanied by dispute. The concept of voting trust has not a unified representation. I think:" Voting trust means one or several client (shareholder) according to the trust contract, take their voting rights to the trustee. The trustee exercise the voting rights and other subsidiary rights which closely related to the voting rights within the period that limit prescribed by the trust contract or the law. " Voting trust is a kind of trust, but the client's identity is special; Voting trust is shareholder exercise their voting right at an indirect way, but it is different from other indirect ways of voting execution methods, it is irrevocable, durable, scalable; Voting trust is a kind of means that shareholders fight for the control of the company. Today, The United States, Japan and Taiwan of China are the best about voting trust. Voting Trust produced in the United States, it experienced the fate of affirmation to deny to certain in the United States. At the beginning, a lot of case law admitted its effectiveness. Later, because trust is to be a tool to achieve monopoly, and it has caused a lot of damage to the social economy, so A lot of American courts deny its effectiveness in the 19th century. But because its irreplaceable value adapt to the needs of economic development, and the formulation of the antimonopoly law (Sherman) in 1840, effectively prevent the voting trust is as means to achieve monopoly. Therefore, The United States were beginning to recognize the validity of the voting trust. Today, in order to avoid the drawback and play the value of voting trust, All states outside the Manchester state have recognized the validity of voting trust in the form of statutory law in The United States. Moreover, Manchester state has acknowledged the effectiveness of voting trust in practice. There are not the rules about voting trust in Japanese Commercial Code, But, voting trust is not uncommon in the practice. The voting trust in the practice is that shareholders conduct trust on their shareholders' rights for the purpose, rater than conduct trust on voting right independently. There are regulations about voting trust in company law and merger of voting rights law in Taiwan of china. But the application scope is limited to merger, and the trustees are limited to professional trust agencies or financial companies are engaged in trust business.
There are unique value of voting trust in our country:benefits to state-owned listed companies'operating and restructuring, helps to solve the list of ESOP plans and can become a characteristic service of our country. There are not direct expression about v.oting trust in our laws and regulations, but are not the rules of prohibition about voting trust. And voting trust had been used to finance successfully by Qingdao Beer. Therefore, there is necessary and possible to establish the system of voting trust. After comparing with other countries'law about voting trust, the author thinks that our country should be provide for principle on voting trust in company law. As far as the designation of specific system, the paper mainly explains the following content:a valid voting trust should have a purpose and deadline allowed by the law or the contract; Trustee must be careful, honest and credit for the profits of client when the trustee exercises the voting right. The paper explains the rights and obligations of the parties in the legal relationship; the solutions when the difference occurs among the trustees; the restrictions when trustee exercise the voting rights; the civil liability when trustee violates the obligations after comparing the rules on voting trust of American Company Law.
现今,关于表决权信托研究最多的是美国、日本和我国台湾地区。表决权信托产生于美国,在美国经历了肯定到否定再到肯定的命运。产生之初,判例法上多承认其有效性,但由于后来表决权信托被作为实现垄断经营的工具,给美国的社会经济造成了很大的损害,19世纪的美国法院多否定其有效性。但由于其不可替代的价值适应经济发展的需要,而且,1840年制定的反垄断法(谢尔曼法)有效的防止了表决权信托被当做垄断经营的手段。所以,美国后期的制定法开始承认表决权信托的有效性,以期避免其弊端发挥其最大的制度价值。现今的美国,除了曼彻斯特州以外,各州都以成文法的形式承认了表决权信托的有效性。而且,曼彻斯特州在实践中也已承认了表决权信托的效力。日本商法典中没有关于表决权信托的明文规定,但是在公司实践中却屡见不鲜。其实践中的表决权信托是指以行使表决权为目的,将股东权中的所有权利进行信托的信托,而不是将表决权从股权中独立出来而进行的信托。我国的台湾地区在其公司法和企业并购法中对表决权信托做了明文规定。不过其表决权信托的应用范围仅限于企业并购时,而且受托人仅限于专业的信托机构或兼营信托业务的金融公司。
表决权信托在我国具有独特的价值：有利于我国上市公司国有股的运营和重组、有利于解决我国公司职工持股计划的上市,而且可以成为我国信托机构的特色服务。我国相关法律、法规中没有关于表决权信托的直接规定,但是也没有不允许表决权信托的禁止性规定,而且2002年青岛啤酒就曾利用表决权信托成功融资。所以,我国有必要也有可能建立表决权信托。本文在比较了现今世界的相关立法体例后,笔者认为我国应该在公司法中对其进行原则性规定,而对于具体的实施则参照信托法的相关规定。对于表决权信托的具体制度的设计,在将我国公司法及信托法的相关规定与美国公司法的相关规定进行比较分析的基础上,阐释了表决权信托必须具有符合法律规定或者协议规定的期限和目的、经过登记与公示才能成立与生效；受托人应该为委托人的利益,诚实信用的行使表决权。同时对共同受托人发生分歧时的解决方法；对法律关系当事人的权利与义务；受托人行使表决权的限制及受托人违反信托义务时的民事责任问题进行了论述。
The development of voting trust is accompanied by dispute. The concept of voting trust has not a unified representation. I think:" Voting trust means one or several client (shareholder) according to the trust contract, take their voting rights to the trustee. The trustee exercise the voting rights and other subsidiary rights which closely related to the voting rights within the period that limit prescribed by the trust contract or the law. " Voting trust is a kind of trust, but the client's identity is special; Voting trust is shareholder exercise their voting right at an indirect way, but it is different from other indirect ways of voting execution methods, it is irrevocable, durable, scalable; Voting trust is a kind of means that shareholders fight for the control of the company. Today, The United States, Japan and Taiwan of China are the best about voting trust. Voting Trust produced in the United States, it experienced the fate of affirmation to deny to certain in the United States. At the beginning, a lot of case law admitted its effectiveness. Later, because trust is to be a tool to achieve monopoly, and it has caused a lot of damage to the social economy, so A lot of American courts deny its effectiveness in the 19th century. But because its irreplaceable value adapt to the needs of economic development, and the formulation of the antimonopoly law (Sherman) in 1840, effectively prevent the voting trust is as means to achieve monopoly. Therefore, The United States were beginning to recognize the validity of the voting trust. Today, in order to avoid the drawback and play the value of voting trust, All states outside the Manchester state have recognized the validity of voting trust in the form of statutory law in The United States. Moreover, Manchester state has acknowledged the effectiveness of voting trust in practice. There are not the rules about voting trust in Japanese Commercial Code, But, voting trust is not uncommon in the practice. The voting trust in the practice is that shareholders conduct trust on their shareholders' rights for the purpose, rater than conduct trust on voting right independently. There are regulations about voting trust in company law and merger of voting rights law in Taiwan of china. But the application scope is limited to merger, and the trustees are limited to professional trust agencies or financial companies are engaged in trust business.
There are unique value of voting trust in our country:benefits to state-owned listed companies'operating and restructuring, helps to solve the list of ESOP plans and can become a characteristic service of our country. There are not direct expression about v.oting trust in our laws and regulations, but are not the rules of prohibition about voting trust. And voting trust had been used to finance successfully by Qingdao Beer. Therefore, there is necessary and possible to establish the system of voting trust. After comparing with other countries'law about voting trust, the author thinks that our country should be provide for principle on voting trust in company law. As far as the designation of specific system, the paper mainly explains the following content:a valid voting trust should have a purpose and deadline allowed by the law or the contract; Trustee must be careful, honest and credit for the profits of client when the trustee exercises the voting right. The paper explains the rights and obligations of the parties in the legal relationship; the solutions when the difference occurs among the trustees; the restrictions when trustee exercise the voting rights; the civil liability when trustee violates the obligations after comparing the rules on voting trust of American Company Law.
引文
1何宝玉.信托法原理研究.北京：中国政法大学出版社.2004.12：2
2陈向聪.信托法律制度研究.北京：中国检察出版社.2007.4：2
3陈向聪.信托法律制度研究.北京：中国检察出版社.2007.4：3
4曾珊.我国信托公示法律制度研究.硕士学位论文.中南大学.2009：6
5何宝玉.信托法原理研究.北京：中国政法大学出版社.2004.12：4
6邓峰.浅议股东表决权信托法律关系的客体.贵阳学院学报(社会科学版).2007.1(3)：47
7R·W·汉密尔顿.公司法.北京：中国人民大学出版社.2001：590
8王军武.建立中国表决权信托制度的法律思考.贵州财经学院学报.2009.5：76
9孙晓曼.论表决权信托及对我国的借鉴意义.硕士论文.山东大学.2007：3
10万士旭,黄建.股东表决权信托制度.法律分析及完善.中国西部科技.2007.12：47
11刘俊海.股份有限公司股东权的保护.北京：法律出版社.2004：356
12梁上上.论表决权信托.法律科学.2005.1：83
13邓峰.浅议股东表决权信托法律关系的客体.贵阳学院学报(社会科学版).2007.1(3)：47
14彭筱璇.浅议股东表决权信托——以中小股东保护为中心.硕士学位论文.上海交通大学.2007：2
15梅慎实.现代公司法人治理结构规范运作论.北京：中国法制出版社.2001：323
16陈建.中外公司案例及分析.北京：改革出版社.1995：218
17虞政平编译.美国公司法规精选.北京：商务印书馆.2004：60
18梁上上.论股东表决权—以公司控制权为中心展.北京：法律出版社.2005：248
19[台]工文字.表决权契约与表决权信托.法令月刊.2003.3：37—38
20同19
21任海伦.孙晓曼.美国股东表决权信托制度对我国的借鉴意义.山东财政学院学报2007.6：77
22熊宇翔.表决权信托运用的一个成功范例—青啤股权变更案的深层次解读.税收与企业.2003.3：50
23[台]王文宇.表决权契约与表决权信托.法令月刊.2003.3：37—38
24漆丹.我国股份公司股东表决权信托之法律问题研究.学位论文.中南大学.2006：46
25何宝玉.信托法原理研究.北京：中国政法大学出版社.2004：204
26同上
27郭影.论股东表决权排除——以此探求对控股股东的规制.硕士学位论文.华东政法学院.2007：2
28聂毅.受托人违反信托的民事赔偿责任比较研究.理论月刊.2009.9：122
[1]杨崇森.信托与投资.台北：正中书局.1983
[2]何宝玉.英国信托法原理与判例.北京：法律出版社.2001
[3]朱少平,葛义.中国信托法起草资料汇编.北京：中国检察出版社.2002
[4]张民安.公司法上的利益平衡.北京：北京大学出版社.2003
[5]梅慎实.现代公司法人治理结构规范运作论.北京：中国法制出版社.2003
[6]虞正平.美国公司法规精选.北京：商务印书馆.2004
[7]刘俊海.股份有限公司股东权的保护.北京：法律出版社.2004
[8]何宝玉.信托法原理研究.北京：中国政法大学出版社.2005
[9]赵旭东.新公司法.北京：人民法院出版社.2005
[10]赵旭东.新公司法条文释义.北京：人民法院出版社.2005
[11]陈向聪.信托法律制度研究.北京：中国检察出版社.2007
[12]陈雪萍,豆景俊.信托关系中受托人权利与衡平机制研究.北京：法律出版社.2008
[13]关景新.中国信托法律操作实务.北京：法律出版社.2008
[14]熊宇翔.表决权信托运用的一个成功范例——青啤股权变更案的深层次解读.信托投资研究.2002.2
[15]王文字.表决权契约与表决权信托.法令月刊.2003.3
[16]赵俊强,朱腾.论表决权信托在解决拟上市公司个人持股问题中的应用.经济师.2003.7
[17]王艳.表决权信托与小股东利益保护研究.商业经济与管理.2003.4
[18]刘正峰.信托制度基础之比较与受托人义务立法.比较法研究.2004.3
[19]覃有土,陈雪萍.表决权信托.控制权优化配置机制.法商研究.2005.4
[20]周剑龙.中国股东大会制度的改革与完善.法学评论.2005.2
[21]林嘉,李敏.TCL集团职工持股信托方案评析——运用信托方式解决职工持股问题的法律思考.法学杂志.2005.26(5)
[22]楚风华,毕旭齐.表决权信托的基本理念分析.牡丹江师范学院学报(社会科学版).2006.4
[23]漆丹.我国股份公司股东表决权信托的法律效力.中南大学学报(社会科学版).2006.12(4)
[24]胡智强.论表决权信托——以小股东利益保护为背景展开的研究.现代法学.2006.28 (4)
[25]郇志茹.表决权信托之理论正当性证明.法学.2007.10
[26]邹杨.股东表决权行使方式多样化之探讨.海南大学学报(社会科学版)2007.25(4)
[27]赵焕芝,孙晓蔓.论股东表决权信托制度对规范关联交易的作用.2007.5
[28]邓峰.浅论股东表决权信托法律关系的客体.贵阳学院学报(社会科学版).2007.1(3)
[29]王萍.论我国表决权排除制度的构建及完善.法制与社会.2008.10
[30]王彪.论股东表决权信托的社会功能.重庆职业技术学院学报.2008.17(1)
[31]叶敏.对我国职工持股信托的法律建议.中国集体经济.2009.10
[32]王勇.股东表决权制度研究.南都学坛.2009.29(1)
[33]俞珍珍.关于我国信托无效之法律后果研究.河北科技大学学报(社会科学版).2009.9(1)
[34]徐卫.解读信托法律关系中的信任海南大学学报(人文社会科版).2009.27(3)
[35]贾翱.论表决权信托与中小股东保护.行政与法.2009.12
[36]高尉泷.论信托合同的识别——以信托意思表示为中心.法制与社会.2009.4
[37]聂毅.受托人违反信托的民事赔偿责任比较研究.理论月谈.2009.1
[38]张洁.我国信托立法的缺陷分析.乐山师范学院学报.2009.24(10)
[39]王月,曾莉.信托机制在员工持股计划中的法律问题研究.新西部.2009.10
[40]刘明洋.论表决权信托的法律属性.决策与信息(下旬刊).2010.10
[41]焦洪涛,郭辉.我国信托成立要件规定的不足及完善.经济论坛.2010,(2)
[42]曹锦秋,刘莎.论股东表决权信托的客体.烟台大学学报(哲学社会科学版)2010.23(4)
[43]陈颖.论将表决权信托引入中国的必要.知识经济.2010.17
[44]聂毅,文杰.论完善我国受托人违反信托的民事责任制度.湖北大学学报(哲学社会科学版).2010.37(1)
[45]孙晓曼.论表决权信托及对我国的借鉴意义.硕士学位论文.山东大学.2007
[46]彭筱璇.浅议股东表决权信托——以中小股东保护为中心.硕士学位论文.上海交通大学.2007,
[47]刘利荣.股权信托法律问题研究.硕士学位论文.南昌大学.2009
[48]王晓武.股权信托在国企改制中的应用及相关问题研究.硕士学位论文.山东大学.2009
[49]涂立强.论美国信托受托人违反信托义务的赔偿责任.硕士学位论文.厦门大学.2009
[50]曾珊.我国信托公示法律制度研究.硕士学位论文.中南大学.2009
[51]Hary G. Henn,JohnR.Alexnader.The Law of Corporations.Horn Book Series Press.1983
[52]Frank H. Easterbrook, Danlel RFisehel.The Economic structure of Corporate La. Harvard University Press.1991
[53]Geoge Gleason Bogert,Geoge Taylor Bogert.The Law of Trusts and Trustees. West Group Press.1993
[54]Robert W Hamilton.The Law of Corporations.West GrouP press.1996
[55]Janet Dine.Company Law 4th Edition. Palgrave Press.2001
[56]John Anton Leavitt. The Voting Trust.Columbia University press.2001
[57]StePhen M. Bainbridge.Corporation Law and Economices.New York Foundation Press.2002
[58]Chantal Stebbings.Private Trustee in Victorian England.Cambridge University Press.2002
[59]D. J. Hayton. The Law Of Trusts.Law Press.2004
[60]Graham Moffat,Dr Gerry Bean. Trusts Law Text and Materials.Cambridge University Press.2005
2陈向聪.信托法律制度研究.北京：中国检察出版社.2007.4：2
3陈向聪.信托法律制度研究.北京：中国检察出版社.2007.4：3
4曾珊.我国信托公示法律制度研究.硕士学位论文.中南大学.2009：6
5何宝玉.信托法原理研究.北京：中国政法大学出版社.2004.12：4
6邓峰.浅议股东表决权信托法律关系的客体.贵阳学院学报(社会科学版).2007.1(3)：47
7R·W·汉密尔顿.公司法.北京：中国人民大学出版社.2001：590
8王军武.建立中国表决权信托制度的法律思考.贵州财经学院学报.2009.5：76
9孙晓曼.论表决权信托及对我国的借鉴意义.硕士论文.山东大学.2007：3
10万士旭,黄建.股东表决权信托制度.法律分析及完善.中国西部科技.2007.12：47
11刘俊海.股份有限公司股东权的保护.北京：法律出版社.2004：356
12梁上上.论表决权信托.法律科学.2005.1：83
13邓峰.浅议股东表决权信托法律关系的客体.贵阳学院学报(社会科学版).2007.1(3)：47
14彭筱璇.浅议股东表决权信托——以中小股东保护为中心.硕士学位论文.上海交通大学.2007：2
15梅慎实.现代公司法人治理结构规范运作论.北京：中国法制出版社.2001：323
16陈建.中外公司案例及分析.北京：改革出版社.1995：218
17虞政平编译.美国公司法规精选.北京：商务印书馆.2004：60
18梁上上.论股东表决权—以公司控制权为中心展.北京：法律出版社.2005：248
19[台]工文字.表决权契约与表决权信托.法令月刊.2003.3：37—38
20同19
21任海伦.孙晓曼.美国股东表决权信托制度对我国的借鉴意义.山东财政学院学报2007.6：77
22熊宇翔.表决权信托运用的一个成功范例—青啤股权变更案的深层次解读.税收与企业.2003.3：50
23[台]王文宇.表决权契约与表决权信托.法令月刊.2003.3：37—38
24漆丹.我国股份公司股东表决权信托之法律问题研究.学位论文.中南大学.2006：46
25何宝玉.信托法原理研究.北京：中国政法大学出版社.2004：204
26同上
27郭影.论股东表决权排除——以此探求对控股股东的规制.硕士学位论文.华东政法学院.2007：2
28聂毅.受托人违反信托的民事赔偿责任比较研究.理论月刊.2009.9：122
[1]杨崇森.信托与投资.台北：正中书局.1983
[2]何宝玉.英国信托法原理与判例.北京：法律出版社.2001
[3]朱少平,葛义.中国信托法起草资料汇编.北京：中国检察出版社.2002
[4]张民安.公司法上的利益平衡.北京：北京大学出版社.2003
[5]梅慎实.现代公司法人治理结构规范运作论.北京：中国法制出版社.2003
[6]虞正平.美国公司法规精选.北京：商务印书馆.2004
[7]刘俊海.股份有限公司股东权的保护.北京：法律出版社.2004
[8]何宝玉.信托法原理研究.北京：中国政法大学出版社.2005
[9]赵旭东.新公司法.北京：人民法院出版社.2005
[10]赵旭东.新公司法条文释义.北京：人民法院出版社.2005
[11]陈向聪.信托法律制度研究.北京：中国检察出版社.2007
[12]陈雪萍,豆景俊.信托关系中受托人权利与衡平机制研究.北京：法律出版社.2008
[13]关景新.中国信托法律操作实务.北京：法律出版社.2008
[14]熊宇翔.表决权信托运用的一个成功范例——青啤股权变更案的深层次解读.信托投资研究.2002.2
[15]王文字.表决权契约与表决权信托.法令月刊.2003.3
[16]赵俊强,朱腾.论表决权信托在解决拟上市公司个人持股问题中的应用.经济师.2003.7
[17]王艳.表决权信托与小股东利益保护研究.商业经济与管理.2003.4
[18]刘正峰.信托制度基础之比较与受托人义务立法.比较法研究.2004.3
[19]覃有土,陈雪萍.表决权信托.控制权优化配置机制.法商研究.2005.4
[20]周剑龙.中国股东大会制度的改革与完善.法学评论.2005.2
[21]林嘉,李敏.TCL集团职工持股信托方案评析——运用信托方式解决职工持股问题的法律思考.法学杂志.2005.26(5)
[22]楚风华,毕旭齐.表决权信托的基本理念分析.牡丹江师范学院学报(社会科学版).2006.4
[23]漆丹.我国股份公司股东表决权信托的法律效力.中南大学学报(社会科学版).2006.12(4)
[24]胡智强.论表决权信托——以小股东利益保护为背景展开的研究.现代法学.2006.28 (4)
[25]郇志茹.表决权信托之理论正当性证明.法学.2007.10
[26]邹杨.股东表决权行使方式多样化之探讨.海南大学学报(社会科学版)2007.25(4)
[27]赵焕芝,孙晓蔓.论股东表决权信托制度对规范关联交易的作用.2007.5
[28]邓峰.浅论股东表决权信托法律关系的客体.贵阳学院学报(社会科学版).2007.1(3)
[29]王萍.论我国表决权排除制度的构建及完善.法制与社会.2008.10
[30]王彪.论股东表决权信托的社会功能.重庆职业技术学院学报.2008.17(1)
[31]叶敏.对我国职工持股信托的法律建议.中国集体经济.2009.10
[32]王勇.股东表决权制度研究.南都学坛.2009.29(1)
[33]俞珍珍.关于我国信托无效之法律后果研究.河北科技大学学报(社会科学版).2009.9(1)
[34]徐卫.解读信托法律关系中的信任海南大学学报(人文社会科版).2009.27(3)
[35]贾翱.论表决权信托与中小股东保护.行政与法.2009.12
[36]高尉泷.论信托合同的识别——以信托意思表示为中心.法制与社会.2009.4
[37]聂毅.受托人违反信托的民事赔偿责任比较研究.理论月谈.2009.1
[38]张洁.我国信托立法的缺陷分析.乐山师范学院学报.2009.24(10)
[39]王月,曾莉.信托机制在员工持股计划中的法律问题研究.新西部.2009.10
[40]刘明洋.论表决权信托的法律属性.决策与信息(下旬刊).2010.10
[41]焦洪涛,郭辉.我国信托成立要件规定的不足及完善.经济论坛.2010,(2)
[42]曹锦秋,刘莎.论股东表决权信托的客体.烟台大学学报(哲学社会科学版)2010.23(4)
[43]陈颖.论将表决权信托引入中国的必要.知识经济.2010.17
[44]聂毅,文杰.论完善我国受托人违反信托的民事责任制度.湖北大学学报(哲学社会科学版).2010.37(1)
[45]孙晓曼.论表决权信托及对我国的借鉴意义.硕士学位论文.山东大学.2007
[46]彭筱璇.浅议股东表决权信托——以中小股东保护为中心.硕士学位论文.上海交通大学.2007,
[47]刘利荣.股权信托法律问题研究.硕士学位论文.南昌大学.2009
[48]王晓武.股权信托在国企改制中的应用及相关问题研究.硕士学位论文.山东大学.2009
[49]涂立强.论美国信托受托人违反信托义务的赔偿责任.硕士学位论文.厦门大学.2009
[50]曾珊.我国信托公示法律制度研究.硕士学位论文.中南大学.2009
[51]Hary G. Henn,JohnR.Alexnader.The Law of Corporations.Horn Book Series Press.1983
[52]Frank H. Easterbrook, Danlel RFisehel.The Economic structure of Corporate La. Harvard University Press.1991
[53]Geoge Gleason Bogert,Geoge Taylor Bogert.The Law of Trusts and Trustees. West Group Press.1993
[54]Robert W Hamilton.The Law of Corporations.West GrouP press.1996
[55]Janet Dine.Company Law 4th Edition. Palgrave Press.2001
[56]John Anton Leavitt. The Voting Trust.Columbia University press.2001
[57]StePhen M. Bainbridge.Corporation Law and Economices.New York Foundation Press.2002
[58]Chantal Stebbings.Private Trustee in Victorian England.Cambridge University Press.2002
[59]D. J. Hayton. The Law Of Trusts.Law Press.2004
[60]Graham Moffat,Dr Gerry Bean. Trusts Law Text and Materials.Cambridge University Press.2005